Can't Log Moving Caches More than Once

[glorkar]

Simple in theory, yes. Simple in execution? I honestly don't know. Programming is not one of my strong suits!

[Vertigo]

Should be easy

[RVRoadTrip]

I will look into this, but it may be next week. The campground we are in has terrible cell signal so internet is slow. And maybe I am having a senior moment, but what is ALR? Additional logging requirement?

[Cachegeek]

Additional Logging Requirements

Where you may have found the cache but the owner requires one more step to count the find. Something such as dressing up and having your picture taken at the cache. I remember one cache that was at a stone frog and you had to sign the log plus post a pictures of you kissing the frog for the find.

After the ban of ALR's most people just left the ALR's in for the fun and some people removed them on advice from reviewers.

[TermiteHunter]

Short of a CO imposed ALR, why would you not be able to log it more than once. While it may be the same container it is in a new location possibly hidden in a completely different manner. It is as if the cache exists for only a single find and is then retired. As the owner of the first moving cache on OCUS I assume at some point I will have to go find it someplace I didn't put it for maintenance. I don't intend to log a find on it but perhaps I should be able to. If someone wants to run up there numbers chasing it around I don't have a problem with it. It would be like someone going after a FTF. With the currently limited number of available caches and OC cachers this would be like having a new cache published on every move that may keep others involved in the site.

[Cachegeek]

I assume at some point I will have to go find it someplace I didn't put it for maintenance.

Not necessarily. If you ask people to keep it within a certain mileage then yes you should do maintenance . However if the cache travels to another state I would send a note to the next finder or the previous hider asking to do the maintenance.

This is why vacation caches are not allowed. Per the guidelines you must be able to perform maint.. The way around this is to have a local do the maint for you but this must be OK'd by the reviewer.

[TermiteHunter]

Maint on the cache was not the issue here, rather could it be logged by myself or by others more than once. It was just a statment in order to present a situation that is likely to occur for my moving cache. My particular cache is supposed to remain within the County. I would hope many would perform the maint as needed on a more mobile cache without prompting especially if it were some great distance from it's place of origin.

[RVRoadTrip]

I am still considering this and have not yet decided what is best. I can see pros and cons of each scenario but am leaning towards leaving it as it is... you can log a "Found It" once but then use comments for additional finds. If you aren't concerned about the numbers, then it wouldn't matter. I will watch this thread for additional feedback on the issue.

[Vertigo]

I am still considering this and have not yet decided what is best. I can see pros and cons of each scenario but am leaning towards leaving it as it is... you can log a "Found It" once but then use comments for additional finds. If you aren't concerned about the numbers, then it wouldn't matter. I will watch this thread for additional feedback on the issue.

You are assuming that nobody is concerned about numbers, and I guess maybe you're taking the stance that numbers are bad. What if I wanted to keep an accurate measurement of how many times I found a hide that I haven't found before? When a cache moves, there is a new challenge to find the cache.

If so, then why allow "finds" at all on the site? Why not just make all entries "notes", also why do you have find statistics for each cache.

A cacher should be able to log a moving cache more than once. I'm not sure why there is any confusion here?

[RVRoadTrip]

There is no confusion, I understand your point very well. As for the numbers, the only thing I am taking into consideration when it comes to "the numbers" is this particular cache type. It was brought up previously in the thread and I just touched on it in my reply. A final decision has not been determined so there is no need to be defensive about your position. I want to gather more feedback and take it from there. I'm very flexible about these sort of things... being old and mellow. Wait, is 47 old? Nevermind, stay on topic.